SCOTUS Grants Guantanamo Prisoners Habeas Corpus

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by flaja

By locking people up at Gitmo has our government not taken away their right to liberty and to pursue happiness? And just how do know that these people deserve to have these rights taken from them for criminal activity if we have proven in a court or tribunal that they are in fact criminals?

Why don’t you give us a list of countries that take away inalienable rights of non-citizens without American-style legal due process?

Why don't you give me a list of countries that do not? Do some research and get back to me. Have you been to any third world countries. How about Africa. I can name quite a few. American-style due process is just that, American. Some other countries have similar laws but they are not the same. Look up Miranda Warnings, what other countries have those?

Just how do you know that these criminals have the rights afforded to them?

[flaja]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Does everyone believe that we as humans have a Creator, a higher being, a God that made us what we are?

What has this to do with the topic under discussion? If you agree that inalienable rights exist, it does not matter what the source of these rights is.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by flaja

Your documentation for this claim is what?

Name those that do not. A very simple search on google will yield you thousands of searches.

[flaja]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I am not about to defend all of the enemy combatants captured and sent to Gitmo.

Without a trial with legal due process rights, how do you know which, if any, of the people held at Gitmo are enemy combatants?

The way I understand it is there is only a handfull that should and will stand trial under US law, even if it is by Military Tribunal.

You say that non-citizens have no legal due process rights in America, so why bother to give anyone at Gitmo a trial? Why not simply authorize you to go down there and bash all of their heads in because they are not U.S. citizens?

Enemy Combatants are not entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness any more than a serial killer in the US or anyone else who is accused of a crime is entitled to such rights.

You’d make a good Nazi since you would willfully deprive anyone who is merely accused of a crime (and I would presume by your statement that you include citizens and non-citizens alike) of their due process rights just because they have been accused.

[flaja]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

How could they be illegals if they are not here illegally? Who says illegals are not given a hearing?

No one, but this is my entire point. We don't know that an illegal is an illegal without giving them legal due process whereby they are proven to be illegal.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by flaja

What has this to do with the topic under discussion? If you agree that inalienable rights exist, it does not matter what the source of these rights is.

Because if you are using our Constitution as an example of "inalienable rights", and you want to use literal examples of such a right, then you must agree that some form of a higher power gives them to you:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men."

You can't cherry pick the bits you want to agree with if we follow your track of literal translations.

[flaja]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

No, no one can including you. This is an area where there is much discussion. Plain wording? Please. People which much greater credentials than you or I have been having these debates for 200 years.

Amazing. The only thing you know of me is what has transpired on this board. But yet you presume to know what my credentials are.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by flaja

No one, but this is my entire point. We don't know that an illegal is an illegal without giving them legal due process whereby they are proven to be illegal.

Well are they illegals or not? I am using your terms. Either you are here legally or not. So by your reasoning if we capture people who have jumped our border we have to give them a hearing? Hmmm, I think not.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by flaja

Amazing. The only thing you know of me is what has transpired on this board. But yet you presume to know what my credentials are.

Amazing. So far I know that I do not agree with your statements, that much is clear. I am not really interested in your credentials. This is a discussion on a forum, not really all that important in the greater scheme.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by flaja

Does this means that you support occasional torture?

Any act of torture on the part of the U.S. or on behalf of the U.S. is deplorable.

So far this is not a discussion about torture. That would be another discussion. Don't change the subject. Answer my previous questions if you want to continue.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by flaja

Without a trial with legal due process rights, how do you know which, if any, of the people held at Gitmo are enemy combatants?

I don't have all the answers. So far as they are not US Citizens I do not believe they have the same rights as the rest of us. What part of that did you miss? I am not asking you to agree with me.

You say that non-citizens have no legal due process rights in America, so why bother to give anyone at Gitmo a trial? Why not simply authorize you to go down there and bash all of their heads in because they are not U.S. citizens?

Because I would rather send them directly to their home countries and let them do with them as they wish, not my problem.

You’d make a good Nazi since you would willfully deprive anyone who is merely accused of a crime (and I would presume by your statement that you include citizens and non-citizens alike) of their due process rights just because they have been accused.

Amazing. The only thing you know of me is what has transpired on this board. But yet you presume to know what my credentials are.

[flaja]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Most certainly I did. It is in black and white post #62. It is written on paper on the Constitution itself:


"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

No where does it say we the people of the United States establish this Constitution for all people of the world under any conditon.

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by flaja

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…

The Constitution is for US citizens alone.

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

No where does it say we the people of the United States establish this Constitution for all people of the world under any conditon.

[TheMercenary]

I am still waiting for you to cite where the United States Constitution applies to all people of the world who are not citizens of the United States.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Well, flaja, you could start by reading up on the Semitic language family and their internal resemblances. And be very careful about bellowing "Nazi!" -- this lot will invoke Godwin's Law of Flame Fights at the drop of an eyeshade (come to think of it, an eyepatch), let alone the drop of a hat.

LookLex

Semitic Languages (and Phoenician)